LONDON — Even by UKIP’s standards, its latest leadership crisis has been farcical.

This past week should have been an easy one for the party: David Cameron received a mixed reception for some of his suggested reforms at the European Council meeting, plus an increasing number of senior Conservatives are moving towards Brexit. But instead of capitalizing on the government’s European woes, UKIP’s two most senior figures descended into another row about the party’s future.

Douglas Carswell, UKIP’s sole MP, and its leader, Nigel Farage, have never been the easiest of bedfellows, but the pair’s differences have leapt out into the open. The argument went public Friday, thanks to a documentary Carswell has been making with his local BBC station in Essex.

In a reflective program on his life as an MP, he told the reporter that UKIP “needs to change gear and to change its management if it’s to go to the next level.” The MP for Clacton cited the party’s poor performance in the Oldham West by-election, which “said to me, very clearly, I think we need a fresh face.” And there was one other dig at the leader too: “I don’t want to wake up the morning after the European referendum and hear it was the postal votes” — a reference to Farage’s accusation that the recent by-election result was “bent.”

Carswell insisted he did not intend to start a coup, but the timing was certainly suspect.

Firstly, Farage was out of the country — a perfect time to sow uncertainty. Secondly, Carswell filmed the documentary on the proviso that anything he said would not be reported on until parliament was in recess. The House of Commons retired for its Christmas break Thursday, as he would have known, and the remarks were duly made public the day after.

* * *

Since then all hell has broken loose, at least in UKIP-land. Farage has hit back at Carswell in several interviews — warning his only MP that he is isolated within the party, that his criticisms are “going to have to end” and that he has “never seen a party that is more solidly united around policy, direction and leadership than it is today.”

He has keenly cited a poll which suggests 91.4 percent of UKIP voters back his leadership. All is hunky dory, according to Farage, and Carswell is just one rogue voice who needs to “put up or shut up.”

UKIP has become possibly the first political party to have a full-scale backbench rebellion with just one MP.

The party’s chairman Steve Crowther has also been on the attack. “This news was released on the day we were celebrating the utter collapse of the prime minister’s negotiating position in Europe,” he pointed out on Radio 4. “All political parties have conversations about how it’s going. But these are things that ought to be held within the party.”

Crowther also announced that UKIP’s National Executive Committee will be speaking to Carswell in January about these “very unhelpful” remarks, which raises the question of a suspension, expulsion or some form of punishment.

UKIP has become possibly the first political party to have a full-scale backbench rebellion with just one MP. In fact, it does not have a frontbench to rebel against — just a leader who appears to disagree fundamentally with its sole Westminster representative. It’s odd to see how quick Farage has been to dismiss Carswell’s views, given how much focus the party put on making a Westminster breakthrough in May’s general election. The party’s campaign team hoped to return three or four MPs, but Carswell became the party’s lone legislator. Most political parties tend to love a winner; but UKIP, it seems, is the exception.

The conflict between Farage and Carswell is becoming increasingly exasperating. Ever since Farage reneged on his promise to resign as leader if he failed to become an MP, the party has lost much of its credibility. The momentum has gone, even if it remains stable in the opinion polls. An In/Out referendum on Britain’s EU membership is on the horizon next year and the focus on Euroskeptics has moved from the “Kippers” to the Brexit campaigners.

* * *

UKIP is still being led by a man who has failed to become an MP seven times, someone who has clung on to power when he promised not to, and appears to have reached the maximum heights of where he can take the party. This ineptitude came to a crunch point in Oldham West. Farage was overly confident about UKIP’s chances, predicting a close contest. UKIP’s leaked internal numbers said it was going to be tight. But they were 10 points out from the final result — Labour won in a landslide and UKIP was humiliated.

Under its current leadership, UKIP does not have the money, knowledge or leadership to campaign professionally.

On the other hand, Carswell needs to decide on his future. If he is truly unhappy about the direction Farage is taking UKIP, his actions are having little effect. All of the talk since December 18 has been about Carswell’s future, not Farage’s. If he does not want to lead UKIP, there are other credible figures who have been critical of Farage to rally behind —including his close comrade Suzanne Evans, UKIP’s deputy chairman. Evans was expected to run to succeed Farage earlier this year, but was snubbed after Farage “unresigned.”

These tensions emanate from an indisputable point. Under its current leadership, UKIP does not have the money, knowledge or leadership to campaign professionally. It has lost thousands of members since May and dozens of its local councilors have defected elsewhere. There may be a chunk of disaffected working-class voters, but UKIP appears currently incapable of convincing these people it is a serious party. The 3.8 million votes it won in May are not to be sniffed at, but are worthless if that means just one MP under Britain’s electoral system.

So in a sense, Farage and Carswell are both correct. UKIP could do with a “fresh face,” and its juvenile behavior has made the Brexit campaigns wary. But there are few others in the party rallying behind these criticisms. Given the events of the past week, it’s hard to see how Farage and Carswell can continue to co-exist in the same party. 2016 may well be time for one of them to “put up or shut up.”

Sebastian Payne is deputy editor of the Spectator’s Coffee House blog.